I thought maybe it was somethin like that. Thank you drive through.
Desk Top Dyno
- Thread starter tvt59
- Start date
-
In addition…. The fatter the flow curve the better the power return. On high performance and race cams, the goal is to lift the valve as high as the head can flow the air and let it sit there while the engine is going down the air. The better the low lift is the better the cylinder fills not just at the low lift points but it helps move more air and fuel sooner and hopefully a good ramming effect dynamic is also taking place with more air and fuel being drawn in with a larger amount sooner.
Most head porters and racers will seek this because they know this will add power from the fatter air and fuel curve it brings in. Some will say it’s really not a whole lot and there is a certain amount of truth to it but it is that stack up the little things and add them up deal. The cylinder heads ability to move air is a known super key area and the sooner you move more air and fuel the merrier it will be.
The operator picks what lifts to measure at.
Newbomb Turk
Well-Known Member
Keep waiting. Time slips don’t mean ****, unless you are in a corner and can’t defend what you do.
Pretty childish that you call out Brett Miller for not posting time slips.
Stop talking like jpar and grow up.
So you don't choose what lifts your gonna measure at ?
The lift most use became the de facto standard but you could use any random other points you find logical or not, or am I way off base here ?
Last edited:
Most people look for the industry standard of .100-.700 on heads like these and .1000 on W8 and W9 heads. I prefer to go .050 after .300 because that gives me info I can use. I flowed a customers heads yesterday and gave him numbers up to .700 as he’s running a .700 lift cam but I ran it up to .750 to see how I did and give me info.
1) Not once did I "boast"
2) If You want to see My face a**hole, it's in the cat pics thread.
3) Not once did I "belittle", "trash", or anything like it on that head. In fact, if somebody uses a valve job that makes it difficult to achieve good flow at that lift, it shows that is as good as a well done factory head despite that fact.
4) The #'s I posted were from My Buddy's AAR 'Cuda, which actually had a Rotomaster Turbo kit on it when purchased, and when I did them. They were flowed by another shop for those #'s, & EQ's w/1.92's actually flow a few more than that, & the MP Eddys flow 1/2 a dozen more..both OOTB...so I'm hardly crowing. In the end, the car was switched back to a proper 6bbl setup. A real car, with real timeslips, not a trailer queen, with way less squeeze than it should have for a 292°PShaft & ran 12.35-12.45@109.
5) You triggered telling Me to "go brag to Brett", lol, WTF Dude...Your reading comprehension is the one that's lacking, when I said "& no, We are not racing flow benches" I meant it, apparently that's beyond Your "comprehension".
I love winter. Lol
That’s the way to do it! Keep checking. I like the every .050 check. It paints a bigger and better picture of what’s going on.
Oh My Lord your still yammmering on and on!
Truly LMAO @ the reply.
Just so you understand, I did t bother reading your dribble and I just moved on.
You - are - sooooooo stupid it’s silly.
The above post is proof you can not understand reading comprehension and just can’t let it go you’re so twisted up and butt hurt. Your sooooooo lost it’s amazing.
9.41 @ 143 mph 365ci W/8 powered Dart in 2010. I imagine he faster now.
I thought You were "done with this guy"That’s the way to do it! Keep checking. I like the every .050 check. It paints a bigger and better picture of what’s going on.
Oh My Lord your still yammmering on and on!
Truly LMAO @ the reply.
Just so you understand, I did t bother reading your dribble and I just moved on.
You - are - sooooooo stupid it’s silly.
The above post is proof you can not understand reading comprehension and just can’t let it go you’re so twisted up and butt hurt. Your sooooooo lost it’s amazing.
Such a stupid ***….
John, since a flow bench is just really for air flow improvement or correction and basic " tell what a head has for cfm", what kinda flow numbers do you think a bench would show if the camshaft lobe was involved, opening on its particular ramp, and at speed ?
Because I see guys on there flow bench running a particular lift for 10 seconds or longer, a valve isn't open at that particular lift for longer than, id guess way less than a second. I imagine the entire lobe -valve lift is done before .050 of a second ( wild *** guess)
Probably need some high speed cameras and other cool stuff to test like that. It seems that would be a more real world test.
Do you know or heard of anyone trying to test like this ?
Okay, yeah I'm always thinking a little more than I should lol
That almost sounds like something the madman loaded in your gun to ask me. Lol
Bullshit! Keep thinking!
DionR
Well-Known Member
Sorry, I didn’t get to sit down with my laptop and mess with the flow numbers like requested. Might be tomorrow before I do.
On the topic of port flow numbers and my version of Desktop Dyno 2000, I know it does some extrapolation of things like cam info, so I suspect it does the same with the port flow numbers. I can plug in numbers at certain values but no idea what it does if the valve lift exceeds those numbers or what it uses between them. My guess is that it extends the curve if the lift exceeds the entered numbers. But if the flow numbers end just before the numbers “drop off” ( ) I bet it gets it wrong. So, in this case the more info the better and if they include the 0.050 data points even better.
I have the manual for my copy of DD and it talked about the extrapolation of the shape of the cam lobe and how DD is going to give a more accurate result if the advertised numbers are entered. I was going to review the manual again to see if it said anything about the port flow numbers but have done so yet.
On a note about the terminology of “drop off”, I find it funny that in my mind the term was used correctly for port flow numbers that only gained 5 or 6 cfm between points. The increase of cfm “dropped off” at that point. If it had lost flow, then I would have said it “lost flow”. But I am no head porter nor am I an engine builder so not arguing that my terminology is correct, only that it was how I thought about it.
On the topic of port flow numbers and my version of Desktop Dyno 2000, I know it does some extrapolation of things like cam info, so I suspect it does the same with the port flow numbers. I can plug in numbers at certain values but no idea what it does if the valve lift exceeds those numbers or what it uses between them. My guess is that it extends the curve if the lift exceeds the entered numbers. But if the flow numbers end just before the numbers “drop off” (
) I bet it gets it wrong. So, in this case the more info the better and if they include the 0.050 data points even better.I have the manual for my copy of DD and it talked about the extrapolation of the shape of the cam lobe and how DD is going to give a more accurate result if the advertised numbers are entered. I was going to review the manual again to see if it said anything about the port flow numbers but have done so yet.
On a note about the terminology of “drop off”, I find it funny that in my mind the term was used correctly for port flow numbers that only gained 5 or 6 cfm between points. The increase of cfm “dropped off” at that point. If it had lost flow, then I would have said it “lost flow”. But I am no head porter nor am I an engine builder so not arguing that my terminology is correct, only that it was how I thought about it.
No sir, I am a free thinker & I was just wondering.
John is capable of replying to me on his own.
Yep John isn't bashful that's for sure.
Exactly
Probably easier to read the air flow during a dyno run and divide by 8 to figure real world cfm for each cylinder.
-
