[tom s]

Nunzi told me years ago the tube needs the foil when RPMs approached 7000 range.Early factory heads did not have the foils,later did.They must have found something.FWIW,Tom

[Stan Weiss]

Originally Posted by mgarblik

John, I enjoy your posts and wish you would post more often. Happen to like Nirvana and that song. Here are the numbers: With a 5/8" tube in the port, flow was -14 CFM@ .800 lift and -17 CFM @ 1.0" lift. Head continued to flow until the retainer contacted the valve guide at 1.250". Flow, 445 CFM @ 1.0". That was 10 years ago. 2.250 intake valve on a 4.250 bore@28" of water. Air speed was slower and smoother without the tube, especially at lower lifts, less than .600". Around .600" lift the flow disruption from the tube was evident from the sound of the flow bench, but as lift increased, it smoothed out again around .750"-.800" lift. Having a tube in there can't be the best situation. But keeping true to the design, we adjusted the port size to compensate On nitro, total port volume was the primary design concern, a place to store liquid fuel for the next intake event. I guess I would summarize by saying the tube looks awful. But can be dealt with if that's the design head you want to run. The contoured design of the Don Johnson DCI version is an example. My guess is Don was encouraged when he first saw the effect of the tube and worked around it. As you know, many 4 valve designs intentionally place a wall in the intake port. IMO, not a show stopper.

The wall you talk about in the 4 valve intake port to me is no different than the intake port walls in the plenum of a single plain intake manifold. The difference with the tube is after the tube you want the 2 flow stream to merge back together again.

Stan

[wrench]

Well, ports without tubes in them are considered "assault " ports. They will be banned soon anyway. You should learn to work with them😀

[GTOGEORGE]

Originally Posted by mgarblik

John, I enjoy your posts and wish you would post more often. Happen to like Nirvana and that song. Here are the numbers: With a 5/8" tube in the port, flow was -14 CFM@ .800 lift and -17 CFM @ 1.0" lift. Head continued to flow until the retainer contacted the valve guide at 1.250". Flow, 445 CFM @ 1.0". That was 10 years ago. 2.250 intake valve on a 4.250 bore@28" of water. Air speed was slower and smoother without the tube, especially at lower lifts, less than .600". Around .600" lift the flow disruption from the tube was evident from the sound of the flow bench, but as lift increased, it smoothed out again around .750"-.800" lift. Having a tube in there can't be the best situation. But keeping true to the design, we adjusted the port size to compensate On nitro, total port volume was the primary design concern, a place to store liquid fuel for the next intake event. I guess I would summarize by saying the tube looks awful. But can be dealt with if that's the design head you want to run. The contoured design of the Don Johnson DCI version is an example. My guess is Don was encouraged when he first saw the effect of the tube and worked around it. As you know, many 4 valve designs intentionally place a wall in the intake port. IMO, not a show stopper.

Mic drop!



GTO George

[455firebird1969]

[QUOTE=Dragncar;
But every one of us knows of someone who has been affected by the opiod crisis . [/QUOTE]

I had a knee replacement in Nov, and I took the pain medication, until no longer needed. I don’t know anyone affected by drugs either, maybe I’m lucky in that regard. My job has always been subject to drug testing, and it still does, that’s probably why. I work with, and hang out with people that don’t take drugs.

The best way to not get addicted to drugs is to not take them. It’s that simple.

[johnta1]

Originally Posted by The Boss

Funny, I think of this one...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecunQO_uoIg

X2!!!!!!



Have to be Born to Run!

[john marcella]

Originally Posted by mgarblik

John, I enjoy your posts and wish you would post more often. Happen to like Nirvana and that song. Here are the numbers: With a 5/8" tube in the port, flow was -14 CFM@ .800 lift and -17 CFM @ 1.0" lift. Head continued to flow until the retainer contacted the valve guide at 1.250". Flow, 445 CFM @ 1.0". That was 10 years ago. 2.250 intake valve on a 4.250 bore@28" of water. Air speed was slower and smoother without the tube, especially at lower lifts, less than .600". Around .600" lift the flow disruption from the tube was evident from the sound of the flow bench, but as lift increased, it smoothed out again around .750"-.800" lift. Having a tube in there can't be the best situation. But keeping true to the design, we adjusted the port size to compensate On nitro, total port volume was the primary design concern, a place to store liquid fuel for the next intake event. I guess I would summarize by saying the tube looks awful. But can be dealt with if that's the design head you want to run. The contoured design of the Don Johnson DCI version is an example. My guess is Don was encouraged when he first saw the effect of the tube and worked around it. As you know, many 4 valve designs intentionally place a wall in the intake port. IMO, not a show stopper.

I don't care about flow numbers. In fact I don't care so much I recently sold my flow bench.
The wall in a 4 valve head needs to be there for support for the seat register. If not there will be too much radial distance around the seat Unsupported, and the head will fail.
Also with this type of design there is not a rapid contraction and expansion occurring it only Contracts. And to take it further the location of it is extremely close to the throat where it should be!
Now take a ram or 5 head for example, Say you have a port that's 2.5 tall And a .625 push rod tube in it. That's a cross-section of 1.5625 with no Radius in the corner. Add radius in the corner and it's very quickly gonna go to 1.7 plus. That would generate an extremely rapid change in crocs Section vs Distance.
If this area is appropriately sized then the resulting area just Before & After is not, and to the scale of about 25 to 30% !

But all that being said doesn't mean it still aint gonna work, I'm very sure there's gonna be big power made with the heads exactly the way they are. My intent in starting this post was purely for entertainment, And wasn't supposed to go further than a friendly little poke. I didn't mean for to get into a technical discussion or any type of bashing. I momentarily forgot what PY is like, My bad

[mgarblik]

No bashing from me, that's for sure. Your a technical guy so that's why I enjoy reading the posts. Your work speaks for itself. Also, some humor doesn't hurt around here also. The guy who taught me most of what I know about cylinder heads was Joe Mondello. He ported thousands of cylinder heads and DID NOT own a flow bench until he won one in a Superflow raffle at the Advanced Engine Technology Conference. So I understand the over emphasis on strictly flow numbers. That's one of the reasons I am not too worried by our flow numbers vs our goals. To me, it's just another tool in the tool box to see where I am and if what I am doing is having the desired effect and where in the lift cycle, the effect is moving. Every head is some kind of compromise if maintaining some of the original design is part of the equation. The Wilcox design Pontiac head, moving the tube out of the intake tract but maintaining the Ram Air V valve layout, removes that problem. For us, the tube is not as big a problem as other demons we are fighting in the engine design. We are now making approximate power to the other cars we compete against. More than the few BB Chevies that run the class and the rest are Brad Anderson and Alan Johnson Hemi's. Would like to think trying to run a Ram Air V is not as crazy as marrying Courtney Love. That didn't work out too well for Kurt.

[Dragncar]

Originally Posted by Aaron Quinton

Yep it's on me. I'm not sharp enough to keep up with your "magic". Brother I respect what you do, and you've accomplished lots. Just either share info or not. I'm quite capable of talking code or sharing real info. And I get it, the folks that "can't keep up" aren't sharp enough to hang with you. Right on.

I don't feel entitled to anything you've developed. Put a patent in and roll. My only issue is why dangle the carrot like your Jesus when you're not sharing anything meaningful?

Brother when have I come at you like this before? If you feel that way I apologize.

"apologize" there you have it ! Click back on the first link, scroll down, click on "All Apologies", great song off of that Unplugged session.
They way you are going off on some of the big dogs around here it might be in order.
Just giving you some $h!t. Its what this thread was supposed to be about.

[Dragncar]

Originally Posted by 455firebird1969

I had a knee replacement in Nov, and I took the pain medication, until no longer needed. I don’t know anyone affected by drugs either, maybe I’m lucky in that regard. My job has always been subject to drug testing, and it still does, that’s probably why. I work with, and hang out with people that don’t take drugs.

The best way to not get addicted to drugs is to not take them. It’s that simple.

I don't hand out with dopers either. You know people, there are closer than you think. People who are at say work, going through stuff and you don't even know about it. Its like saying you don't know of people who have been killed in auto accidents. I believe its taken over as the #1 killer. Its so bad life expediencies are going "down" among certain population groups because of it.
I get drug tested too.

[unruhjonny]

Originally Posted by john marcella

This song plays in my head...

https://youtu.be/jlRdcEmcatw


Hehe

I got it immediately...
Big fan of the music too, so I also didn't need to play the video to hear it and get the joke...

I've only seen a RAV once...

Funny post.

[455firebird1969]

Originally Posted by Dragncar

I don't hand out with dopers either. You know people, there are closer than you think. People who are at say work, going through stuff and you don't even know about it. Its like saying you don't know of people who have been killed in auto accidents. I believe its taken over as the #1 killer. Its so bad life expediencies are going "down" among certain population groups because of it.
I get drug tested too.

I guess my point is, I don't feel sorry for those that choose to take drugs, and then it screws up thier life, or kills them. It's a choice we all make, choose wisely. Artists are no different, we are all talented in one way or another, but it should never be an excuse to be a drud addict., that ends up terminating your existence.

[Dragncar]

Originally Posted by 455firebird1969

I guess my point is, I don't feel sorry for those that choose to take drugs, and then it screws up thier life, or kills them. It's a choice we all make, choose wisely. Artists are no different, we are all talented in one way or another, but it should never be an excuse to be a drug addict., that ends up terminating your existence.

Life is a whole lot of little choices added up. Morals and choices matter. I think "artists" or just plain rock stars the lifestyle is just too much for some. They don't call it the fast lane for nothing.
Its well known it was too much for Kurt.
mgarblik , I wonder how your heads would do on a big NA engine ?
BTW, He was crazy for marrying that b!T%. Just picked up the DVD of "Soaked in Bleach"all about her offing him. Done by her ex private investigator. Some say its all BS, I will watch and make up my own mind.

Topic, what is the biggest NA Pontiac. Langers 1280 I believe. Is it totally out there to think Dons RAV could not get north of 1200HP ? If Mike can get close to 1200 with E heads and the best one out there gets 100 HP- maybe 120 HP more does that point the finger at bore spacing ?
If Langer had a 1280HP intake port and a 800HP exhaust port Wilcox's RAV heads should have a shot at more power you would think. The ex side should have a advantage compared to a traditional Pontiac.
One thing, Mike getting even that close to the high dollar CVJuans with E heads with the stock steel guides sure says a lot about JMs abilities.

[Elarson]

Originally Posted by Dragncar

mgarblik , I wonder how your heads would do on a big NA engine ?.

The combustion chamber is totally wrong for that. Way too big and no squish areas, because nitro doesn’t like anything that’s like a shock wave. Ports aren’t optimized for NA and no water jackets so they’re confined to alcohol or nitro.

Eric

[GTOGEORGE]

Your post is funny! I’m pretty sure Mikes engine has nothing to do with RA5 heads, I think it’s not a great example for anything. I’m not sure it really made even 1,100 hp, 40 degree temps will turn a moderate head into a good head! Johns car is Bad A$$, Dons heads could surprise people.....we’ll see.

GTO George

[LiL Jack]

Originally Posted by GTOGEORGE

Your post is funny! I’m pretty sure Mikes engine has nothing to do with RA5 heads, I think it’s not a great example for anything. I’m not sure it really made even 1,100 hp, 40 degree temps will turn a moderate head into a good head! Johns car is Bad A$$, Dons heads could surprise people.....we’ll see.

GTO George

Mike, made more then 1100 to go 7s.

Your butt hurt for your inadequacies not be able to run 7s is strong in you.
Along with your hatred for an old Dinosaur E head which IMHO has been the single best cylinder head to grace a traditional Pontiac for the masses.

Those RAV heads better hurry up and do something this year or they will end up in the Pontiac trash bin next to the CV1 heads.


Merry Christmas

[GTOGEORGE]

Jack,
Why do do you have to throw rocks in your glass house? Mike car was/is quick I have NEVER said anything but, probably one of the quicker single four barrel cars out there. Seriously on a summer day.....you tell me, numbers are what they are. I’ve run 8.0’s in 80 degree temps.....all freaking day without breaking a sweat ! Case closed!! As for the RA5 heads.......how long is it taken you to get the bugs out? Just saying! Screw Christmas I hate winter, I want summer to go Racing!



GTO George

[Dragncar]

Originally Posted by GTOGEORGE

Your post is funny! I’m pretty sure Mikes engine has nothing to do with RA5 heads, I think it’s not a great example for anything. I’m not sure it really made even 1,100 hp, 40 degree temps will turn a moderate head into a good head! Johns car is Bad A$$, Dons heads could surprise people.....we’ll see.

GTO George

When is the last time you had some sort of even moderate intellectual back and fourth conversation around here ?
Now that is funny.
Now since music is a part of this thread, go listen to some Justin Beiber or Nickelback, whatever your speed is.

BTW, trying to take away from what Mike accomplished is a bad look. Even for you. If you can not figure that at the very least its a great example of how far you can take a E head with serious effort by smart, dedicated people you are beyond help.

[GTOGEORGE]

Originally Posted by Dragncar

BTW, trying to take away from what Mike accomplished is a bad look. Even for you. If you can not figure that at the very least its a great example of how far you can take a E head with serious effort by smart, dedicated people you are beyond help.

BTW.......I’m not taking nothing away from anyone, just stating facts. Ive said more then once Mike had a quick car and probably one of the faster single four barrel Pontiacs out there. Like I said 40 degree temps make an AVERAGE head into a GOOD head.

GTO George

[Tom Vaught]

By that comment above, George, does Methanol cooled intake charge make an average Supercharger engine a decent low 8 second engine (Boosted)? Take away your methanol cooled intake charge how quick would you be George? Just asking a technical question for a supercharger guy to answer. How much does that make your average head into a good head?

Tom V.