Search results for query: *

I’d probably pass on the tensioner next go around.

Well that sucks. On the plus side, you caught it before there was a hole in it. Take your time…….. get it out and get a more thorough look at everything. It might not be that bad.

You guys are starting to get close to peak “dyno room misery index” season :eek:

I sure hope you guys can stretch this out for 10 pages or so.

With as many cnc ported heads as TF offers, I’d be surprised if they didn’t have a few cnc machines. Maybe slight differences between which machine did the porting? The test to me would be similar to what Kaase did with his heads. Test a “crappy” set on the engine, then do the minimum amount of...

Pretty big spread for a cnc ported head imo. That #5 is just lagging behind. But since a minor tweak to the SSR wouldn’t have much impact at all to the port area……. I wonder how much it would really be holding things back. And then, is it that far behind if you tested them all with the...

What about numbers from the lowest flowing ootb TF port you’ve tested?

The best stock stroke 440 I’ve seen here was 712hp. For 805hp……..that’s a completely different build. Keep in mind that particular 540 was a very basic bracket build with no trick parts. Same basic cubes(542), higher end build with better heads was 860hp. Now the 451” needs to be 1.9hp/ci to...

Some numbers- Real world results of a 12:1 540 BBM with ported -1 heads and a 281/293-112 roller cam with the Indy manifold and an 1150 on it. 805hp……1.49hp/ci If you swapped in a stock stroke rotating assy, kept the same CR, and reused the rest of the entire top end(which are all parts that...

625hp/410ci = 1.52 hp/ci 625hp/367ci = 1.70 hp/ci My side of the argument is based on years of engine building and dyno testing……..and that experience has shown me it’s not all that hard to make 1.52hp/ci, but it’s def not as easy to take the same parts that got you to that point, and now make...

I guess I didn’t really get across where I was going there……..which was……… EA has spent considerable time and effort trying to sort them out……..probably more time than he’d have hoped……. for where he’s at with them to this point. It doesn’t appear there is really much low hanging fruit with...

My takeaway up to this point is, it’s not likely someone is going to “fluff up” a TF190 and end up with a head that ends up flowing 305+ without turbulence and a curve that’s solid thru .700” lift. Although, honestly……..I wouldn’t even expect that out of a 190cc SBM non-offset rocker port.

“a given top end and cam package” will be more optimized for a particular displacement, better than something that strays too far up or down. I’m just saying, let’s see one of these shootouts where the top end package is more suited for the bigger combo.

It could be taller, which is why I asked for clarification. I’m pretty sure in one of EA’s other porting threads, where he was trying to sort out a SM SSR, he added some epoxy to the SSR. I was wondering if he had gone in that direction on this head….or not.

I see this thread as a step by step analysis of porting processes and their evaluations on a specific head…..in this case a TF190 SB head. Especially at this early stage of the thread, sidetracking to discussions of results from a different bench, and a different head……..is just a distraction...

I’ll be the naysayer here…….. A different type of head, tested on a different brand bench(that uses a different operating system)…….that would just be info not pertinent to this discussion and more suited for its own thread……imo. But…….it’s not my thread.

Someone should go about it from the other angle. Build the bigger cube version with enough head/intake/carb/cam/header to make good upper rpm power, in the 1.5+hp/ci range………..then put all that stuff on something with a noticeably shorter stroke………and see if it will peak high enough to keep up.

“Tall apex 2.08” Taller than as delivered(as in added material there)? Or just taller than the one you lowered/laid back? Have you removed the swirl vane at any point yet? What are the numbers like on the worst ootb TF port you’ve tested? On the first set of 360-1’s I ported, they went...

Despite the findings from Powells that the cam & lifter hardness were rarely the “reason” behind a failure…….I still think it would be pretty interesting to know how those failed lifters fared on the hardness tester.

My “opinion” is……..the easy way forward to less trans issues is……. Start using the clutch when shifting.

It’s a comp CRH 285s108, part number 24-308-4. “CRH” is a hemi cam. 285/285@.020 250/250@.050 .557/.540 lift 108 lsa .020/.022 lash

There does seem to be confusion about the pricing on the new DLC FT offerings from Comp. They are not priced like the coated or uncoated tool steel lifters(which are $100-ish each). These new DLC coated Hyd lifters are indeed nominally priced at about $125/set...

Looks like a Comp XE284, which is indeed a fast rate .842” design cam. It’s a cam that I’d think of as pretty “unforgiving” in a high RR combo, especially one that was using .842” lifters. The recommended springs are fairly mild duals, but if using those you’d have been wise to remove the inners...

I come up with low-8’s for CR with the 78cc heads, pistons down .155 and .040 gaskets. Just keeping everyone honest ;)

looks like the lifters were soft. That is some serious wear for what sounds like less than full break in time. What was the cam grind? Here’s one after 1/2hr run time on the dyno. Hylift Johnson lifter, Melling cam, SBC The other 15 were perfect. These days, FT cams in high rocker ratio big...

Pressure should be set with the engine running.

Getting off track here, my apologies…… one more- Speedmaster RPM style BB head……….these seemed to have powdered metal seats……. That SM hadn’t quite mastered the seat machining on. I had a little better luck than they did-

The SB SM heads I’ve had here def didn’t seem like they had powdered metal seats, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they did these days. Lots of heads use them now. I got a lot of practice with them prepping Indy EZ heads. I’ve never been able to get a satisfactory finish on them by machining...

I like it!!:thumbsup:

Interesting…… Granted, I haven’t worked over a set of SBM SM heads in a few years……. And who knows if what I worked on then and what they sell nowadays even come from the same source………. But I didn’t have any trouble with the seats on any SM heads I’ve done.